MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estimating the coherence of noise

2015· article· en· W1895592099 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Journal of Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersArmy Research OfficeAustralian Research CouncilIntelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity
KeywordsUnitarityPhysicsCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Statistical physicsNoise (video)Unitary stateQuantumQuantum mechanicsAlgorithmComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Noise mechanisms in quantum systems can be broadly characterized as either coherent (i.e., unitary) or incoherent. For a given fixed average error rate, coherent noise mechanisms will generally lead to a larger worst-case error than incoherent noise. We show that the coherence of a noise source can be quantified by the unitarity, which we relate to the average change in purity averaged over input pure states. We then show that the unitarity can be efficiently estimated using a protocol based on randomized benchmarking that is efficient and robust to state-preparation and measurement errors. We also show that the unitarity provides a lower bound on the optimal achievable gate infidelity under a given noisy process.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it